That's fugly flare, however, this lens is definitely easy to use to avoid flare.
Complaining about flare in this lens would only come from the most amateurish photographers.
DavidBM wrote:
I thought that given the size it came in at, it would be at most as good as the best of the competitors.
This. This is why the lens is so good. Still overly hyped though, just a touch, imo.
The biggest bunch of characteristics this lens has that make it a winner versus the competition, imo, are related to video.
The de-clickable iris, the minimal focus breathing (almost none), the linear focus ring that doesn't stick or have zero feel, the ability to send it away on a drone or mount it to a gimbal without weight issues, the ability to use auto-focus continuously at f1.4 and capture usable footage etc. etc.
This is why it's a significantly better option (for Sony users) than a Canon or Sigma Art and the Nikon is, well, yeah (the Nikkor 1.8/20 though, that's nice).
This forum misses those things often because it's so stills focused and generally landscape focused to boot, the reviews are very narrow and this lens's abilities are very broad.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Since there is a lot of talk about lens contrast, I compared the 24/1.4 GM @f/2.5 to the Loxia 25/2.4 @f/2.4. (Identical histograms)
Can you tell which is which just based on contrast?
Well, the second shot has higher contrast and appears to me to have slightly better corners and slightly less vignetting. I don't own the 25mm, but based on your review and comments, I would guess that the second shot is the Loxia 25mm.
So, let me say what I did. These images were taken on a tripod at same distance and because the Loxia is narrower, I cropped the GM as close as possible to match the Loxia. I also corrected the Loxia's vignetting to get closer to the GM. (Remember the Loxia is wide open). Finally I tweaked color temperature and tint for them to look more similar. (Very small tweak)
This was meant to be a "contrast" comparison only. They have identical histograms, exposure settings and Lightroom tweaks except for the changes mentioned above.
Who said the first is the Loxia was right but let's all agree that they look similar. I consider the Loxia 25/2.4 a very high contrast lens (same level as the ZE 25/2) and therefore the 24/1.4GM is no slouch contrary to what's been suggested in this thread. Having said that, I do think the Loxia wins in contrast and that was noticeable in the infinity tests.
Something I noticed: At the corners, the GM's rendering is actually smoother than the Loxia at these apertures and the Loxia wide open has slightly more LoCA compared to the GM @f/2.5 which is not surprising to me.
BTW: This is the amount of crop needed to match their FOV:
So, let me say what I did. These images were taken on a tripod at same distance and because the Loxia is narrower, I cropped the GM as close as possible to match the Loxia. I also corrected the Loxia's vignetting to get closer to the GM. (Remember the Loxia is wide open). Finally I tweaked color temperature and tint for them to look more similar. (Very small tweak)
This was meant to be a "contrast" comparison only. They have identical histograms, exposure settings and Lightroom tweaks except for the changes mentioned above.
Who said the first is the Loxia was right but let's all agree that they look similar. I consider the Loxia 25/2.4 a very high contrast lens (same level as the ZE 25/2) and therefore the 24/1.4GM is no slouch contrary to what's been suggested in this thread. Having said that, I do think the Loxia wins in contrast and that was noticeable in the infinity tests.
Something I noticed: At the corners, the GM's rendering is actually smoother than the Loxia at these apertures and the Loxia wide open has slightly more LoCA compared to the GM @f/2.5 which is not surprising to me....Show more →
Ya, like you said, it's tough to see and I doubt anyone here can be 100% sure which is which. Thank you for the test as well. While most of us here were being keyboard warriors with our opinions, you put at least the "contrast" aspect into perspective.
hiepphotog wrote:
Ya, like you said, it's tough to see and I doubt anyone here can be 100% sure which is which. Thank you for the test as well. While most of us here were being keyboard warriors with our opinions, you put at least the "contrast" aspect into perspective.
Contrast is definitely a strength for the 24/1.4 GM. Not at Loxia level but very close as demonstrated here.
Here is a sample wide open straight from the camera converted to "Adobe Monochrome". No increase in contrast. Again, no slouch.
GMPhotography wrote:
The word hype at least from my standpoint means more that I’m getting paid in some sort of way or having click bait or an ambassador for Sony or some crap like that. I’m very sensitive to this because I am the one guy that hates these reviewers that are attached to you tube channels and crap like that to earn a living that in most cases are about as worthless as a mosquito. I don’t get paid to do any review or affiliated with any company. I make ALL my money on real clients that pay my rate. I don’t even go outside this forum but share my results with the good members here. So drop the word hype it gives a very bad taste In the members mouths here. The folks here know better. This is not DPR bullshit type of site. I’m here to help people and the story ends there and your throwing my name in a bad reputation environment . That I refuse to be any part of. Maybe it’s a culture thing but hype is a horrible word for people that are truly honest about what they believe in....Show more →
Paisano, i've been away for a while - but something told me this morning i needed to check in - besides being busy, the qty of people on this forum with less than 100 posts but with huge opinions has been too much for me in the past year.....you need to ignore these people. Everyone else understands how much work you and Fred put into your tests - i did a few exhaustive comparisons that were met with nothing but b.s. remarks so i stopped - but you keep on ticking - just ignore the peanut gallery. i'm happy to see the FM community grow, but you'd think people would read a bit more and get a sense for who's who, etc. before spouting off.
In any case, Happy Veterans Day to our heroes and Happy Thanksgiving (coming up) - to put you in a Holiday mood :-)
Is there any comparison available vs. the 16-35GM @24mm? Quite in the middle of the zoom focal length chances are good that it could keep up with the prime except for bokeh of course, just asking stopped down for landscape in this case.
Have to say for a lens that’s not a Zeiss or a Voightlander this lens does render quite nicely. It’s not flat looking which at first surprised me. Sigma for instance many of there lenses I think we can all agree are sharp as heck but I always found they lacked any kind of look which makes them look sterile. Not the 135 but there 24,35,50 never really turned me on. Given how sharp this lens is it’s interesting that it does mirror the Zeiss and Voightlander in ways. Also when I was testing with my basic sharpening which really is quite low I’m starting to think of lowering it more to get a more smooth look to it. Worth experimenting here. One little trick is maybe punch the clarity slightly which would give better micro contrast but back the sharpening off a touch. Something worth playing around on. When I did the 5 lens test the Sony looked a little over sharpened to me. Not that I did that either as it is my base. I found that interesting
, congrats! You finally got that flare unicorn.
. I believe the first one is Loxia's.
